ROBINHOOD CHAIN · ID 4663
THE VERDICT
The last receipt on record for this token — not a live scan.
2 VERDICTS ON RECORD · MOVED +0 SINCE FIRST SCAN (75 → 75)
Top 10 holders hold 100.0% of the circulating float. On raw total supply that's 15.0%, because 85.0% of total supply sits in liquidity pools and is excluded from the float. The float figure is measured against supply outside the pools, so it also moves when pool liquidity moves. The single largest holder is , a contract, holding 100.0% of the float on its own.
No market data, so liquidity cannot be measured.
No supported WETH V3 pool exists, so buy/sell simulation is unavailable.
51 points of this token's scoring surface could not be read this scan, so the score is capped at 84 (top of CAUTION). A check that stands down for want of data deducts nothing, so without this cap a failed read would read the same as a clean result. This is about our coverage, not about the token.
Active owner key: .
EXPLOITBNKR scores 75 — CAUTION. Holder concentration is the one that moved it, 10 points off. Ask me why.
DRAWN FROM THIS VERDICT’S CHECKS — NOT A MODEL ANSWER
OPENS THE PANEL — THAT IS WHERE YOU TYPE
No supported WETH V3 pool exists, so buy/sell simulation is unavailable.
V4 pool discovery was incomplete — the Initialize log sweep could not be read in full — so this token's pool set may be missing a pool, and no pool's share of it can be trusted.
Active owner key: .
Not an upgradeable proxy. The code is fixed.
Contract source is partially verified on the explorer — the code matches, the compiler metadata does not. Read at its implementation .
No mint/pause/blacklist/limit functions found in bytecode.
No fee or limit toggling by the deployer in the transactions searched. This looks at the deployer's recent history only, so calls by a separate fee authority are out of its reach.
Heads up: the scanner is improved continuously, and some fixes only surface once they meet real tokens on production. Our trusted registry — verified LP lockers, known-good launchpad contracts — is checked and approved by a human on the team, so a legitimate project can score lower for a while until we've confirmed its contracts ourselves. A low score is a prompt to look closer, not a conclusion.
Ask why this verdict reads the way it does.